Yes, you're an ass for phrasing it that way and you are clearly not stupid enough to actually need the reasons explained. Or if you are explaining it is pointless so whatevs

ahem, anyway.

See another problem we're having here is your gross oversimplification of the issues.

It's not like "minstrel shows happened/people made fun of PoC" a long time ago, so now we can't do it.

It's about the attitudes towards PoC** that already existed, and where cultivated/strengthened by things like offensive race-face performances and racial caricatures in print.

Stuff, which by the way is still going on today in various race-themed parties where a bunch of people gleefully dress up as caricatures sometimes including the race-face makeup.

The problem is not just that they had the party.

The problem is what the fuck was going through their minds where they can't understand why it's bad to reduce whole groups of people to nothing more than a "fun" and probably insulting costume.

And that's just the crystal-clear cases. I mentioned many other more subtle, on going things such as racism in casting and also the way cosplaying experiences themselves can differ based on race.

(what follows is not even nearly the only case, just one of the most well known)

Quote:

"For a black cosplayer (not to be racist) she did an amazing job!" the original Tumblr post read. It was later was edited to include "I love her skin tone" after all hell broke loose.

Personally, I've always been stuck on those first few words: "for a black cosplayer." As if the bar was set lower for us, as if we weren't expected to perform on the same level as white cosplayers.

I lost track of how many times the post was liked, reblogged, linked to other websites -- even now, nearly three years after the picture was taken, complete strangers will come up and reference it to me at cons, and it's even come up in job interviews. My Venus became the unintentional face of the cosplay race debate online, an unwitting example of "Black cosplayers doing it right," as if 9 times out of 10, black cosplayers were doing it wrong by default.

What kills me is that in person, nobody has the balls to say a word about whether or not they think darker-skinned people should cosplay lighter skinned characters -- but online is a completely different animal. Online, I was "Nigger Venus," and "Sailor Venus Williams" because I am black.

My nose was too wide, lips were too big, I had a "face like a gorilla" and wasn't suited for such a cute character, because I am black. My wig was too blonde, my wig wasn't blonde enough, or, my wig was ghetto because I was making it ghetto, by being black and having it on my head.

And furthermore, if I was going to insist on "ruining characters," I could have at least picked one with black hair so it looked more "natural." I should have worn blue contacts -- but if I had, it would have looked ghetto. Because I am black.

The depths that the insults sink to are enough to scare many interested cosplayers away from even trying. I had an indian friend who refused to cosplay anything other than Indian characters after watching the way people tore into my costumes online.

The ongoing disrespect towards actual dark-skinned cosplayers is another reason it is insulting when white people, who already have the vast majority of characters pale-skinned and primed for their precious 'accuracy,' choose to lark around in dark makeup, facing NONE of the negative stigma that comes with cosplaying as a dark-skinned person, and often automatically receiving more positive attention than actual dark-skinned cosplayers.

...And that stuff, all that stuff that didn't just vanish 100 years ago and is still going on today, IS the context.

This conversation is completely unintelligible without that context.

You question is still meaningless because you can't take that away. I really, really don't understand what you are fishing for.

**I do try to keep these conversations inclusive and I don't want to leave out caricatures of Native peoples or Asians which have also been issues in recent years. (and also, in the past of course) So my own use of PoC should generally be understood broadly. [/quote]

Samsally, I was trying to actively steer the conversation. Away from something I already knew (there's a shitty history attached to race-face makeup) and towards something I didn't know (is there any other reason race-face makeup is shitty in and of itself?). Who, besides an Australian apparently (lols?), would honestly ask if it's perfectly fine to just wear race-face makeup?

Stripeypants: Dear sweet Jesus, I'm basically in love with you for actually answering the question and not just attacking what I asked. Thank you, thank you, thank you. I will just state, for the record, regarding #8, I never wanted to dress in raceface. I knew the problem. I wasn't trying to pretend it wasn't there. I was just looking to delve a little deeper into the issue. (I also love how the 8 ) came up as a smiley face)

Istancow: I used to work at a restaurant that served a KILLER Chilean Sea Bass. Best fish I've ever had. Never really had them as pets though.

Only in your own personal fantasy universe where your phrasing and framing aren't pompously bizarre and hollowly condescending.

I believe I said "Are you saying that a thought experiment and a hypothesis are perfectly identical? Your position seems unclear."

If you consider that "pompously bizarre and hollowly condescending", your standards are strange to me. How would you have phrased it, in your normal universe?

No, you did not. If you had said those words, it would not have been as bad.

What you said was wondering out-loud if ShadowCell was confusing the two, and then when he indicated that it was not him that was confused, you demanded that he provide a definition of each rather than looking the terms up your own damn self in order to support your own stance.

You essentially said, "I think you're wrong, prove that you're not."

That's a fallacy in argument, condescending, pretentious, and just plain lazy.

Stripeypants: Dear sweet Jesus, I'm basically in love with you for actually answering the question and not just attacking what I asked. Thank you, thank you, thank you. I will just state, for the record, regarding #8, I never wanted to dress in raceface. I knew the problem. I wasn't trying to pretend it wasn't there. I was just looking to delve a little deeper into the issue. (I also love how the 8 ) came up as a smiley face)
.

How you talked about it was offensive. Also, it doesn't matter whether you actually wanted to dress in blackface - what matters is your attitude surrounding it.

I was civil to you, but you must remember that no one ever has to explain anything to you. It is important that people do educate, but you can't expect it. And when you are asking for education, you have to be as respectful as you can - and you should both emphasize that you know you are ignorant and accept the information you are given.

Other people here did give you answer and tried to educate you. Not just on your question, but also on your behavior - because you were also missing the information that how you were talking about your question was offensive. You can't get anywhere learning racism if you don't learn the basics of respect.

This is a gift, and if you learn how to receive it, new worlds will open up for you.

Edit: Lots of people don't understand that blackface is not okay, and they are annoyed that people tell them it is offensive. There is that baggage too; you can't assume that anything is too outlandishly offensive for some actual real person to believe it._________________[Stripeypants has enabled lurk mode.]

While I'll never argue that Stripey isn't awesome because clearly he is, I am a little miffed to have it implied I attacked you. Pretty sure you just didn't like my answer.

Which I stand by, the whole thing is a moot point and you've made it abundantly clear that it's more important to push people into responding how you want them to than it is to actually listen to a person of color. Cactuar keeps saying things and you keep talking to the white people instead._________________Samsally the GrayAce

Last edited by Samsally on Sun Jul 21, 2013 2:27 am; edited 1 time in total

Only in your own personal fantasy universe where your phrasing and framing aren't pompously bizarre and hollowly condescending.

I believe I said "Are you saying that a thought experiment and a hypothesis are perfectly identical? Your position seems unclear."

If you consider that "pompously bizarre and hollowly condescending", your standards are strange to me. How would you have phrased it, in your normal universe?

No, you did not. If you had said those words, it would not have been as bad.

What you said was wondering out-loud if ShadowCell was confusing the two, and then when he indicated that it was not him that was confused, you demanded that he provide a definition of each rather than looking the terms up your own damn self in order to support your own stance.

You essentially said, "I think you're wrong, prove that you're not."

That's a fallacy in argument, condescending, pretentious, and just plain lazy.

But I did say those words.

The entirety of my posts were: 1) "I wonder whether you are confusing a hypothesis with a thought experiment." 2) "Please enlighten us. Define a thought experiment, and then a hypothesis." 3) "I had asked you to give your own understanding, Rune [sic], not to give links to google results. Are you saying that a thought experiment and a hypothesis are perfectly identical? Your position seems unclear. If you consider that 'pompously bizarre and hollowly condescending', your standards are strange to me. How would you have phrased it, in your normal universe?"

It is unfortunate that I had to go to the trouble of quoting myself, rather than you being honest enough to do so. Do you stand by your interesting opinion that these three statements sound pompous to you?

For the record, I think blackface a bad thing. I only stopped by to inquire into someone's interesting use of two terms. The parrotfish was an unexpected bonus.

Only in your own personal fantasy universe where your phrasing and framing aren't pompously bizarre and hollowly condescending.

I believe I said "Are you saying that a thought experiment and a hypothesis are perfectly identical? Your position seems unclear."

If you consider that "pompously bizarre and hollowly condescending", your standards are strange to me. How would you have phrased it, in your normal universe?

No, you did not. If you had said those words, it would not have been as bad.

What you said was wondering out-loud if ShadowCell was confusing the two, and then when he indicated that it was not him that was confused, you demanded that he provide a definition of each rather than looking the terms up your own damn self in order to support your own stance.

You essentially said, "I think you're wrong, prove that you're not."

That's a fallacy in argument, condescending, pretentious, and just plain lazy.

But I did say those words.

The entirety of my posts were: 1) "I wonder whether you are confusing a hypothesis with a thought experiment." 2) "Please enlighten us. Define a thought experiment, and then a hypothesis." 3) "I had asked you to give your own understanding, Rune [sic], not to give links to google results. Are you saying that a thought experiment and a hypothesis are perfectly identical? Your position seems unclear. If you consider that 'pompously bizarre and hollowly condescending', your standards are strange to me. How would you have phrased it, in your normal universe?"

It is unfortunate that I had to go to the trouble of quoting myself, rather than you being honest enough to do so. Do you stand by your interesting opinion that these three statements sound pompous to you?

For the record, I think blackface a bad thing. I only stopped by to inquire into someone's interesting use of two terms. The parrotfish was an unexpected bonus.

Keep digging. It's just funny at this point. Yes, those statements sound pompous. And no, you did not say the words, "Are you saying that a thought experiment and a hypothesis are perfectly identical? Your position seems unclear." If you had, you would have said the words, "Are you saying that a thought experiment and a hypothesis are perfectly identical? Your position seems unclear," and not the other words that you did say. I didn't think I needed to re-quote everything you did say in order to emphasize the absence of those words, but thanks anyway for doing it for me.

Does what goes on in your head ever actually match the reality on the page?